Post Your Comment

27 Comments

We're starting to see the first results of what UEFI enables, and board manufacturers are finally starting to experiment with the bounds of what they can do with a UEFI interface. The first UEFI interfaces were largely entrancement of the traditional BIOS interface, and now we're starting to see them get creative.

I look forward to seeing what board makers can do with UEFI, not just in terms of the interface, but what other features they can build around it.Reply

Just because it's graphical doesn't mean it has to be UEFI, I had graphical conventional BIOS systems back in the mid '90s.

And just because it's UEFI doesn't mean it has to be graphical. Intel has been using a UEFI-based configuration interface for years now on their desktop boards, it's just plain text and looks a lot like conventional BIOS.Reply

Anyone know if Ivy Bridge CPU's will later have a variant that works on X79 boards? Otherwise this will have no upgrade path. It's already taken forever to get this platform out. It used to be the high end came out first, not WAY later. And Ivy Bridge isn't that far off for the mainstream now... so will Intel later support the high end/X79 with IB or be massive c***s as usual and make it so that we have to buy another new board for that?Reply

No it won't because Ivy Bridge will be replacement for the current i3,5,7 Sandybridge chips. That said there should be an Ivy Bridge-E ala X78 is for Sandybridge-E but as you say it will be way later.Reply

Yeah thats what i mean, some sort of Ivy Bridge-E version of the chip for X79. Is there any news or conformation on this? Because i've seen nothing about it and dont really want to buy a dead end platform.Reply

So how is this supposed to make using the BIOS more intuitive? For those who are not intimately knowledgable about motherboard layout, this actually makes the BIOS even more difficult to use. I wouldn't even expect my recently adult children to have a clue about clicking on the SATA ports, let alone being able to identify them.

And for those who are more BIOS knowledgable, this doesn't seem to make it any easier to make changes to the BIOS as you would have to "go through" the 3D interface to get to the actual settings, when going directly to the Advanced Mode would likely be faster in that case.

If Gigabyte wanted to make it more intuitive, they would have created a task based interface for the common actions that a less seasoned user would need to do.

But I get it... This is just a gimmick by Gigabyte to differentiate themselves but without providing any real benefit or improvement. Reply

But will Gigabyte finally be offering genuinely useful BIOS-based fan control? You know, like a lot of their competitors have for years? I can understand that easier is better, but build in the fundamentals first guys, then gussy it up.Reply

If you believe they're going to know what parts do what, wouldn't you also have to believe they know how to use the traditional BIOS menu? The one with a ton more maturity, less complexity, less resource requirement, and less room to pointlessly vary setting location across different vendors?Reply

The enthusiast population is not stagnant. Before you were an enthusiast, it goes without saying that you were not an enthusiast. This feature, at the least, will cater to those that want to become enthusiasts.

You are not the only human on the planet. The world does not revolve around you. etc etc etc etc cliche cliche etc etcReply

huh? so because we're enthusiasts we should be stuck with a hideous & cluttery BIOS screen that's all 6 bit text? No thank you! i've been an enthusiast for 14 years, but this UEFI bios is long overdue! I dont miss the DOS days, Windows cleared up everything and made it much easier to navigate around and get straight to what i want! i expect the same to happen with BIOS screens! why should i be stuck w/ 6bit text like back in the EVGA days??? its 2011 and i have a 5870 graphics card and hexa -core cpu, but my bios looks like its from 1985. Get with the times!!!Reply

UEFI is intended to replace aging BIOS, is it not? The "F" in UEFI means firmware, in all other devices, firmware is conceptually equal to traditional BIOS in non-Mac PC. If so, logically people shouldn't call it "UEFI BIOS", it's either BIOS or UEFI. If it's UEFI, the title should just be "3D interface for X79 UEFI".Reply

Lots of pixels depicting computer components are not going to simplify the fundamental complexity of BIOS configuration, which comes down to understanding what the parts of the computer are, how they can be configured, and why you'd use one setting vs. another. Putting up a huge detail picture of a CPU is not going to help someone find the best clock and voltage setting for it.

When you need to be in these settings at all, what you want the minimal amount of graphical obfuscation, application complexity, and vendor-level variance in coming up with new ways and places to tuck away the setting you need. Sometimes less really is more and I'd argue that text menus for BIOS settings are a prime example.

And if next year we're reading that someone has gone even further with a true 3D app that looks great but only requires you to be wearing certain specifically compatible 3D glasses and have a working IR emitter to sync those glasses -- well then we'll know they've really lost their perspective.Reply

It's ashame that I have had too many of their motherboards die on me in the past. Even though they did repair and replace them. I did get them back they than went into the garbage can again so I wont ever suggest or purchase another one again.Reply

- Visual aesthetics. Yes, they do in fact matter. Color and shading to improve contrast. Logical grouping of functionality (without having memory timings on this screen, FSB on another one, TurboBoost on yet another one).

That will truly bring BIOS into the modern age with out this "pretty stuff" in the way. Reply